9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (3) TMI 1900X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... substantive opinion that though the AO has called for information in assessment proceedings in respect of other issues and there is no finding/observation on the above two disputed issues in the assessment order. We find that the CIT s action in revision proceedings that the AO has not made proper inquiry cannot be overlooked. Accordingly, we are not inclined to interfere with the order of the CIT on the disputed issues and affirm the same and dismiss the ground of appeal of the assessee. Order passed by the CIT is ex-parte - HELD THAT:- Prima facie, the CIT(A) has passed the order considering the findings of the AO and there is no representation by the assessee or by the learned AR on the date of hearing. Further, the notice of hearin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vidence, probabilities and the facts and circumstances in the Appellant's case. 2. The Commissioner of income Tax is not justified in low in exercising revisionary power's as the entire proceedings are without jurisdiction and rot in accordance with law. 3. The Commissioner of income Tax is not justified in quashing the order of assessment and directing the assessing officer to make a fresh assessment under the facts and circumstances of the case. 4. The Commissioner of Income Tax failed to appreciate that section 145A has no applicability to the case of the Appellant and the approach of the Appellant is in accordance with law under the facts and circumstances of the case. 5. The Commissioner of Income Tax ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt prays that the appeal may be allowed in the interest of justice and equity. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a cooperative society engaged in the business of banking and filed Return of income on 30/09/2008 with total income of ₹ 68,65,320/-. Subsequently, revised return of income was filed on 31/03/2009 with total income of ₹ 37,51,900/- and the return of income was processed u/s 143(1) of the Income-tax Act,1961 ['the Act' for short]. The main area of working as a co-operative society providing banking facilities to its members. The case was selected for scrutiny and notices 143(2) and u/s 142(1) were issued. In response, the learned AR appeared from time to time and represented the case and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... edings being mercantile except to the extent of interest on loans and advances is accounted on receipt basis. 6. The CIT is of the opinion that the assessee is following mixed system of accounting and dealt with Audit report. Whereas the assessee, in pursuance to the revision notice, filed the details referred at para.6 7 of the order. The CIT considering the submissions of the assessee found that in respect of payment of interest on fixed deposits, it is only calculation of interest payable on fixed deposits outstanding at the end of the year which has been subsequently paid to deposit holders and the CIT also observed at page 5 of the order that the assessee has not produced any proof in support of the claim. The CIT could not unders ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sed by the CIT has erred in passing revision order irrespective of the fact that the assessee is a co-operative society and has been complying with the income-tax guidelines and rules and there is no violation in respect of any section and are covered under the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Rules, 1960. The learned AR s contention on the issue of payment of interest on FD that the assessee is following mercantile system of accounting. In this regard he supported his argument with paper book with tax audit report whereas for the provision for election/general body expenditure, the learned AR s contention that it is actual expenditure incurred by the co-operative society but inadvertently it was shown as provision for election/general body ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... election/general body expenditure even before the Tribunal, the learned AR could not substantiate with evidence in respect of the claim. Therefore, we, considering the facts and circumstances and the financial statements, are of the substantive opinion that though the AO has called for information in assessment proceedings in respect of other issues and there is no finding/observation on the above two disputed issues in the assessment order. We find that the CIT s action in revision proceedings that the AO has not made proper inquiry cannot be overlooked. Accordingly, we are not inclined to interfere with the order of the CIT on the disputed issues and affirm the same and dismiss the ground of appeal of the assessee. 10. We shall now ta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
